Next Article in Journal
Methylomes in Vegans versus Pescatarians and Nonvegetarians
Next Article in Special Issue
Firing up Cold Tumors—Targeting the Epigenetic Machinery to Enhance Cancer Immunotherapy
Previous Article in Journal
Interplay between DNA and RNA Modifications: A Constantly Evolving Process
Previous Article in Special Issue
Epigenetic Regulation of the Non-Coding Genome: Opportunities for Immuno-Oncology
Open AccessReview

Combinatorial Epigenetic and Immunotherapy in Breast Cancer Management: A Literature Review

by 1,2,3,4,*,†, 1,2,3,† and 1,2,3,*
Department of Biomedical Sciences, National Chung Cheng University, Min-Hsiung, Chia-Yi 621, Taiwan
Epigenomics and Human Disease Research Center, National Chung Cheng University, Min-Hsiung, Chia-Yi 621, Taiwan
Center for Innovative Research on Aging Society (CIRAS), National Chung Cheng University, Min-Hsiung, Chia-Yi 621, Taiwan
Division of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chiayi Christian Hospital, Chia-Yi 621, Taiwan
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Received: 11 November 2020 / Revised: 25 November 2020 / Accepted: 30 November 2020 / Published: 4 December 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Targeting the Epigenetic Machinery to Enhance Cancer Immunotherapy)


Breast cancer is one of the leading causes of death among cancer patients worldwide. To date, there are several drugs that have been developed for breast cancer therapy. In the 21st century, immunotherapy is considered a pioneering method for improving the management of malignancies; however, breast cancer is an exception. According to the immunoediting model, many immunosuppressive cells contribute to immunological quiescence. Therefore, there is an urgent need to enhance the therapeutic efficacy of breast cancer treatments. In the last few years, numerous combinatorial therapies involving immune checkpoint blockade have been demonstrated that effectively improve clinical outcomes in breast cancer and combining these with methods of targeting epigenetic regulators is also an innovative strategy. Nevertheless, few studies have discussed the benefits of epi-drugs in non-cancerous cells. In this review, we give a brief overview of ongoing clinical trials involving combinatorial immunotherapy with epi-drugs in breast cancer and discuss the role of epi-drugs in the tumor microenvironment, including the results of recent research.
Keywords: immune checkpoint inhibitors; epi-drug; combination therapy; breast cancer immune checkpoint inhibitors; epi-drug; combination therapy; breast cancer

1. Introduction

Breast cancer, a malignancy of mammalian cells, is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in females and one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide [1]. Major molecular subtypes of breast cancer include luminal A, luminal B, HER2 enriched, and basal-like (or triple-negative breast cancer; TNBC) [2,3]. In clinical practice, some immunohistochemical (IHC) markers, including estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), and Ki-67, can function as surrogate markers capable of identifying molecular subtypes [4,5].
Management of breast cancer is provided by multidisciplinary teams. Early-stage breast cancer is treated by surgical resection followed by neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy, radiotherapy, endocrine therapy, or anti-HER2 therapy. Systemic therapy for metastatic breast cancer includes endocrine therapy, target therapy and cytotoxic chemotherapy. The treatment option for metastatic breast cancer is on the basis of the cancer subtype (Table 1) [5,6]. Endocrine therapy, involving selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen and fulvestrant, and aromatase inhibitors, such as anastrozole, letrozole, and exemestane, is used to treat hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer. Although endocrine therapy can extend the median progression-free survival (PFS) to up to 24 months, resistance to the treatment may occur [7]. One mechanism of endocrine resistance is the upregulation of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway [8]. A phase III study (BOLERO-2) demonstrated that the mTOR inhibitor everolimus, combined with exemestane, can overcome endocrine resistance [9]. Alpelisib is a PI3K inhibitor used as a targeted therapeutic drug. Combined therapy of alpelisib and fulvestrant improved PFS among patients with PIK3CA-mutated, HR-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer who had received endocrine therapy previously [10].
Cyclin D1 is one of the main regulators of the cell cycle. Cyclin D1 amplification is a common oncogenic event in breast cancer, especially in luminal tumors [11]. Overexpression of cyclin D1 in breast cancer cells is also another mechanism of endocrine resistance [12]. Recently, a CDK4/6 inhibitor combined with fulvestrant or aromatase inhibitor was shown to markedly increase PFS and overall survival (OS), and will become an upfront therapy for hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer [13,14,15,16]. For HER2-positive breast cancer, multiple anti-HER2 agents have been developed. These drugs include monoclonal antibodies (trastuzumab and pertuzumab), small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitors (lapatinib and neratinib), and the antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) ado-trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) [6]. Finally, TNBC is usually treated by cytotoxic chemotherapy. Patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations or homologous recombination deficiency may benefit from Poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors [17,18]. In the 21st century, immunotherapy was considered one of the groundbreaking methods for cancer treatment.
Compared to other subtypes, TNBC is more sensitive to checkpoint inhibitors, but the clinic benefit is controversial [19]. In 2018, the IMpassion130 study demonstrated that atezolizumab, an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal ab, plus chemotherapy, improves survival among patients with TNBC whose tumors express PD-L1 [20]. IMpassion131 was similar to Impassion 131 and evaluated atezolizumab in combination with alternative chemotherapy regimen. However, the IMpassion131 study showed that the addition of atezolizumab did not improve PFS and OS. On the contrary, a trend toward better survival in the placebo group was observed (NCT03125902). The role of immunotherapy treating breast cancer is under investigation.
Although the first antibody-based immunotherapy, anti-HER2, was approved in 1998, resistance and relapse remain major barriers in breast cancer treatments. Novel approaches based on combinatorial immunotherapy may act as therapeutic strategies to overcome these impediments. In this review, we summarize recent findings in the combinatorial immuno- and epigenetic therapy in the treatment of breast cancer.

2. Epigenetics and Epi-Drugs

Epigenetics was first described in 1942 by C. H. Waddington [23]. Different from genetics, epigenetics involves the control of heritable phenotypes by post-modifications rather than DNA sequence alteration. Epigenetic modifications also reflect the communication between environment and host factors, as most epigenetic processes require distinct metabolites as substrates, such as acetyl-CoA and α-ketoglutarate, which are generated from the environment [24]. Epigenetic modifications can be briefly classified by the application of the central dogma of molecular biology to DNA methylation, histone modification, and non-coding RNA regulation. Over the past 30 years, an aberrant epigenetic landscape has been defined as a hallmark of cancer [25]. Understanding the epigenetic mechanism is necessary for the development of epi-drugs for targeting epigenetic regulators as a promising strategy for anticancer treatment [26].
DNA methylation is a covalent chemical modification, a common form of epigenetic regulation and response to environmental stress. It involves the modification of the fifth carbon of cytosine by the addition of a methyl group and plays an important role in regulating gene transcription. DNA methylation is also involved in important processes in development, aging, and health, such as X-chromosome inactivation, C to T transition mutation, and silencing of repeated sequences [27]. DNA methylation and demethylation are regulated by DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) and ten-eleven translocation methylcytosine dioxygenases, respectively [28].
Histone modifications, on the other hand, result in conformation and charge changes of the chromatin, which regulate gene transcription or chromatin interaction [29]. The regulators associated with histone modifications are classified as writer, reader, and eraser, which function via chemical group addition, recognition, and elimination on the histone tail, respectively [30]. Histone lysine methylation and acetylation are the major modifications, which have been studied widely in cancers. Mono-methylation and tri-methylation at lysine 4 of histone H3, forming H3K4me1 and H3K4me3, are active enhancer and promoter marks, respectively. On the other hand, tri-methylation of lysine 27 of histone H3, catalyzed by EZH2, one of the members in polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2), is a repressive mark [31]. Acetylation of lysine on histone, which is catalyzed by histone acetyltransferase and histone deacetylase (HDAC), activates transcription and can be recognized by bromodomain-containing proteins [32,33].
Generally, several inhibitors targeting epigenetic writers, readers, and erasers have been developed and clinical trials of those epi-drugs are ongoing. For example, vorinostat, an HDAC inhibitor, is used to treat relapse/refractory cutaneous manifestations of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma [34], and DNMT inhibitors, including decitabine and azacitidine, are available for myelodysplastic syndrome and some acute myeloid leukemia [35,36].
The antitumor effects of epi-drugs encompass cytotoxic effects, apoptosis, growth arrest, differentiation, inhibition of angiogenesis, and immunogenicity [37,38]. Epigenetic therapies may reactivate the expression of genes that have undergone epigenetic silencing, thereby reprogramming the cancer cells [39]. Interestingly, either ER or PR was epigenetically silenced by DNMT and HDAC in breast cancer, and could be restored by epi-drugs [40,41]. However, in contrast to hematologic malignancy, the efficacy of monotherapy with epi-drugs is unsatisfactory in solid tumors. Epi-drugs might have the potential for synergistic or additive effects to augment the efficacy of antitumor drugs or to overcome drug resistance [37]. In this review, we focus on the combination of epi-drugs and immunotherapy in the treatment of human cancer.

3. Rationale for Epi-Drugs Combined with Immunotherapy

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is one of the major forms of cancer immunotherapy. The programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) receptor on the surface of immune cells interacts with its ligand, programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1), which can be produced by tumor cells or immunosuppressive cells, and suppresses the cytotoxic function of T-cells. Antibodies that bind to either PD-1 or PD-L1 can reactivate the immune response of preexisting T-cells [42].
However, the response rate of anti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 inhibition in breast cancer is around 5–10%, and thereafter combination therapy is more practicable for breast cancer [19,20,43]. For example, pembrolizumab plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy increased the proportion of pathological complete response in patients with early TNBC [44]. These results suggest that combination therapies with ICB are very promising. Additionally, the tumor microenvironment has been shown to determine the outcome of cancer treatment. Therefore, a shift in therapeutic strategies from targeting tumor cells to the tumor microenvironment is required [45,46]. On the whole, it is believed that breast cancer is immunologically quiescent, due to a low infiltration of effector cell, tumor mutation burden (TMB), and response rates to ICB [47]. The main mechanisms of tumor evasion include alteration in antigen presenting cells (APCs), dysfunction of effector cells, and changes in tumor cells [48]. Recently, single-cell transcriptomic analysis revealed the heterogeneity of breast cancer in detail. In breast cancer, immunosuppressive macrophages, regulatory T-cells and exhausted T-cells are enriched [49,50]. Previous studies have found that epigenetic changes also control the homeostasis of immune cells and contribute to immunosuppressive phenotypes [51,52]. As human cancers are heterogeneous, the mechanisms by which epi-drugs contribute to non-cancerous cells for cancer treatments are still under investigation. Below, we review ongoing and completed clinical trials involving epi-drugs combined with other therapies, including immunotherapy, in breast cancer (Table 2), and discuss the potential mechanism by which epi-drugs target the microenvironment of breast cancer.

3.1. Targeting DNA Methylation

Azacitidine and decitabine are cytidine analogues that inhibit DNA synthesis at high doses and inhibit DNA methyltransferase at low doses, leading to hypomethylation of DNA [64]. A phase I study of the inhibition of DNA methylation did not show benefits for breast cancer [53,54,55]. A phase II trial was conducted to examine a combination of epigenetic therapy, azacitidine, and a histone deacetylase inhibitor (entinostat) in women with advanced breast cancer. There was one partial response among 27 women with hormone-resistant disease (ORR: 4%), and none in 13 women with TNBC [65].
Inhibiting DNA methylation triggers endogenous retrovirus (ERV) expression, which is usually silenced by DNA hypermethylation. The released dsDNAs are targeted as tumor-associated antigens [66] or are sensed by the cGAS DNA-sensing pathway and further induce type I interferon to engage T-cell infiltration [67]. One study indicated that ERV expression shows a highly positive correlation with immune cytolytic activity in breast cancer [68]. Recently, Panda et al. found that the expression of ERVs was related to the ICB response in clear cell renal cell carcinoma [69], which suggests that a combination of DNMTi with ICB may also improve clinical outcomes in breast cancer. In addition to ERVs, de novo exhaustion-related DNA methylation was a progressive program in effector T-cells during ICB, and inhibition of DNA methylation reversed the progression and improved T-cell rejuvenation [70].
Recently, combinations of DNA methylation inhibitors and immunotherapy have been under investigation. A phase II study (NCT02811497) will assess the antitumor activity of azacitidine in combination with durvalumab for participants with metastatic ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer. Another phase II (NCT02957968) trial is recruiting and will examine short-term neoadjuvant therapy with pembrolizumab plus decitabine for patients with locally advanced HER2-negative breast cancer.

3.2. Targeting Histone Deacetylation

Clinical data for breast cancer treatment using HDAC inhibitor monotherapy are rare [71]. Some phase II trials showed that combining HDAC inhibitors with chemotherapy is a safe strategy. The clinical benefit is observed among heavily pretreated patients, suggesting that addition of an HDAC inhibitor may overcome the resistance to chemotherapy [56,72,73]. Furthermore, breast cancer therapy combined with HDACi also reversed hormone therapy resistance [57,58]. In terms of immunotherapy, Munster et al. reported using tamoxifen in combination with vorinostat and pembrolizumab in the treatment of hormone therapy-resistant breast cancer. A clinical benefit was seen in 5/28 (18%) patients (NCT02395627) [74]. Unfortunately, clinical data for the combination of HDAC inhibitors with immunotherapy are limited. Further clinical trials are ongoing (Table 2).
The role of HDACs has been well investigated in T-cell homeostasis. A previous study demonstrated that loss of HDAC1 and HDAC2 promotes the effector T-cell program by upregulating RUNX3 [75]. Moreover, HDAC11-deficient CD4+ T-cells showed increased expression of Eomes and Tbet, which induced effector phenotypes and inflammatory cytokine secretion [76]. Along with effector T-cells, HDACs also activate the function of regulatory T-cells. The major regulator, FOXP3, interacts with HDAC3 to suppress IL2. Loss of HDAC3 in regulatory T-cells restores IL2 expression and increases the levels of other inflammatory cytokines [77]. Nevertheless, some studies showed conflicting results of other HDACs in T-cell hemostasis [78,79], suggesting that targeting specific HDAC may be necessary.

3.3. Targeting Histone Demethylation

LSD1, also known as KDMA1, is a histone demethylase controlling H3K4 and H3K9 demethylation, which is also a novel therapeutic target in cancer. Numerous inhibitors under ongoing clinical trials have been reported to-date in small cell lung cancer and acute myeloid leukemia [80]. In breast cancer, clinical trials are being performed to investigate the potential of phenelzine sulfate, an LSD1 inhibitor, combined with nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel, Abraxane, for metastatic or advanced tumor (NCT03505528). Unfortunately, clinical trials involving combinatory immunotherapy with LSD1 inhibitor, INCB059872, have only been undertaken for other cancers (NCT02712905).
LSD1 has been reported as a key regulator for stemness and chemo-resistance in breast cancer [81]. Furthermore, targeting LSD1, which causes increased H3K4 methylation, could also cooperate with ICB by ERV-mediated T-cell trafficking in breast cancer [82,83]. Additionally, inhibition of LSD1 can epigenetically reprogram tumor-associated macrophages into M1-like macrophages by increased methylation on H3K4 and H3K9, and disrupt the LSD1–CoREST complex in TNBC [84]. In addition to KDM1A, Wu et al. reported that stimulator of interferon genes (STING), which related to intratumoral CD8+ T-cells, are epigenetically silenced by KDM5B and KDM5C, leading to immune quiescence. These findings suggest that targeting histone demethylation plus ICB may be a viable new strategy for treatment of breast cancer.

3.4. Targeting Histone Methylation

EZH2 is a well-known oncogenic histone methyltransferase. Overexpression of EZH2 has been frequently observed in breast cancer and is associated with breast cancer aggressiveness and the sensitivity to chemotherapy [85,86]. Emerging trials of EZH2 inhibitors are ongoing but mainly limited to hematologic malignancy and soft tissue sarcoma [87].
The inhibition of EZH2 is a double-edged sword for immunotherapy. Peng et al. found that EZH2-mediated H3K27me3 and DNMT1-mediated DNA methylation repress the ability of ovarian tumor to present Th1-type chemokines CXCL9 and CXCL10. Treatment with EZH2i or DNMTi reactivates these chemokines and allows effector T-cell tumor trafficking in the tumor microenvironment [88]. In contrast, Huang et al. reported that suppressing EZH2 activity promotes hematopoietic progenitor cell differentiation to myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), and increases MDSCs in the tumor microenvironment, thus suppressing antitumor immunity [89]. Clinical trials for combination of EZH2 inhibition with immunotherapy have also been initiated in urothelial carcinoma [90], but for breast cancer have not yet been initiated.

3.5. Targeting Bromodomain in Breast Cancer

Bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) inhibition, which disrupts the linkage between enhancer and promoter for transcriptional repression, is a novel therapy for treating breast cancer. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of several BET inhibitors, including birabresib, molibresib and mivebresib, have been established [62,63,91]. However, the toxicities of these BET inhibitors are notable. In a phase I study assessing the safety and pharmacokinetics of BET inhibitor mivebresib in patients with non-specific relapsed or refractory solid tumors, 62/84 (74%) patients had a grade III/IV treatment-emergent adverse event (AE), and all grades of AEs were reported across 81/84 (96%) patients [63]. Another phase I/II dose-escalation study for BET inhibitor molibresib on selected solid tumors, including TNBC, showed 54/65 (83%) patients had a treatment-related AE [62]. Therefore, the drug-related toxicities may limit the usage of combination. Further safety profile and clinical efficacy tests have been initiated in TNBC (NCT03901469) and other tumors (NCT03925428, NCT04116359).
In the immune system, treatment of the BET inhibitor can differentiate effector T-cells into the effector memory phenotype by suppressing BATF [92]. Additionally, Adeegbe et al. reported that BET inhibition attenuates the function of regulatory T cells, and cooperates with PD-1 blockade to facilitate an antitumor response in lung cancer [93,94]. Furthermore, BET inhibition will suppress both PD-1 in effector T cells and PD-L1 in breast cancer cells to overcome tumor-mediated T cell exhaustion in TNBC [95]. These findings suggest the probable effectiveness of combinatory immunotherapy with bromodomain inhibition, especially in targeting T cells. Interestingly, a mathematical model likewise supports the benefit of the BET inhibitor combined with anti-CTLA4 which sustains cytotoxic T cell in tumors [96].

4. Conclusions

A growing body of evidence suggests the probable effectiveness of combinations of epi-drugs with immunotherapy in breast cancer treatment. To overcome the immune evasion of cancer, targeting both tumor cells and the microenvironment is crucial. Therefore, the mechanism of homeostasis of immune cells and the communication between tumor and microenvironment in breast cancer require further investigation. In addition, the heterogeneities of breast cancer are distinct between cancer subtypes, suggesting that it is necessary to investigate the distinct epigenetic dysregulation of non-cancerous cells in the breast tumor microenvironment. In this review, we generally discussed combinatory immunotherapy with epi-drugs, including those involved in DNA methylation, histone modification, and bromodomain inhibition, in several ongoing clinical trials and basic medical research (Figure 1). Additionally, non-coding RNA also can be considered as a therapeutic target. Recently, clinical trials in mesothelioma and lymphoma have begun for several miRNA-based drugs, such as the mir-16 mimic, MesomiR-1, and the mir-155 inhibitor, MRG-106, but the clinical outcomes associated with these two drugs require further investigation in breast cancer. Finally, further investigation into whether combined differential epi-drugs plus ICB for specific targeting of each kind of immunosuppressive cells can be of greater benefit in breast cancer, and how to precisely target specific cells in the tumor microenvironment to prevent conflicting effects, is required. The development of precisely targeted drug delivery systems may improve these novel therapeutic approaches for breast cancer therapy.


This study was supported by grants from Ditmanson Medical Foundation Chia-Yi Christian Hospital Research Program (R109-009), Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST 106-2923-B-194-001-MY3, 108-2314-B-194-003-MY2), and the Center for Innovative Research on Aging Society (CIRAS) from the Featured Areas Research Center Program within the framework of the Higher Education Sprout Project by Ministry of Education (MOE) in Taiwan.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. Bray, F.; Ferlay, J.; Soerjomataram, I.; Siegel, R.L.; Torre, L.A.; Jemal, A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2018, 68, 394–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Perou, C.M.; Sorlie, T.; Eisen, M.B.; van de Rijn, M.; Jeffrey, S.S.; Rees, C.A.; Pollack, J.R.; Ross, D.T.; Johnsen, H.; Akslen, L.A.; et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000, 406, 747–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Sorlie, T.; Perou, C.M.; Tibshirani, R.; Aas, T.; Geisler, S.; Johnsen, H.; Hastie, T.; Eisen, M.B.; van de Rijn, M.; Jeffrey, S.S.; et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2001, 98, 10869–10874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Viale, G. The current state of breast cancer classification. Ann. Oncol. 2012, 23, x207–x210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jackisch, C.; Harbeck, N.; Huober, J.; von Minckwitz, G.; Gerber, B.; Kreipe, H.-H.; Liedtke, C.; Marschner, N.; Möbus, V.; Scheithauer, H.; et al. 14th St. Gallen International Breast Cancer Conference 2015: Evidence, Controversies, Consensus—Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer: Opinions Expressed by German Experts. Breast Care 2015, 10, 211–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Network, N.C.C. Breast Cancer (Version 3, 2020). Available online: (accessed on 10 November 2020).
  7. Reinert, T.; Barrios, C.H. Overall survival and progression-free survival with endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: review. Adv. Med. Oncol. 2017, 9, 693–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. deGraffenried, L.A.; Friedrichs, W.E.; Russell, D.H.; Donzis, E.J.; Middleton, A.K.; Silva, J.M.; Roth, R.A.; Hidalgo, M. Inhibition of mTOR activity restores tamoxifen response in breast cancer cells with aberrant Akt Activity. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2004, 10, 8059–8067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Baselga, J.; Campone, M.; Piccart, M.; Burris, H.A., 3rd; Rugo, H.S.; Sahmoud, T.; Noguchi, S.; Gnant, M.; Pritchard, K.I.; Lebrun, F.; et al. Everolimus in postmenopausal hormone-receptor-positive advanced breast cancer. New Engl. J. Med. 2012, 366, 520–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. André, F.; Ciruelos, E.; Rubovszky, G.; Campone, M.; Loibl, S.; Rugo, H.S.; Iwata, H.; Conte, P.; Mayer, I.A.; Kaufman, B.; et al. Alpelisib for PIK3CA-Mutated, Hormone Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer. New Engl. J. Med. 2019, 380, 1929–1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2012, 490, 61–70. [CrossRef]
  12. Wilcken, N.R.; Prall, O.W.; Musgrove, E.A.; Sutherland, R.L. Inducible overexpression of cyclin D1 in breast cancer cells reverses the growth-inhibitory effects of antiestrogens. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 1997, 3, 849–854. [Google Scholar]
  13. Finn, R.S.; Martin, M.; Rugo, H.S.; Jones, S.; Im, S.A.; Gelmon, K.; Harbeck, N.; Lipatov, O.N.; Walshe, J.M.; Moulder, S.; et al. Palbociclib and Letrozole in Advanced Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 1925–1936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Tripathy, D.; Im, S.A.; Colleoni, M.; Franke, F.; Bardia, A.; Harbeck, N.; Hurvitz, S.A.; Chow, L.; Sohn, J.; Lee, K.S.; et al. Ribociclib plus endocrine therapy for premenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, advanced breast cancer (MONALEESA-7): a randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018, 19, 904–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hortobagyi, G.N.; Stemmer, S.M.; Burris, H.A.; Yap, Y.S.; Sonke, G.S.; Paluch-Shimon, S.; Campone, M.; Blackwell, K.L.; Andre, F.; Winer, E.P.; et al. Ribociclib as First-Line Therapy for HR-Positive, Advanced Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 375, 1738–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Goetz, M.P.; Toi, M.; Campone, M.; Sohn, J.; Paluch-Shimon, S.; Huober, J.; Park, I.H.; Tredan, O.; Chen, S.C.; Manso, L.; et al. MONARCH 3: Abemaciclib As Initial Therapy for Advanced Breast Cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 35, 3638–3646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Belli, C.; Duso, B.A.; Ferraro, E.; Curigliano, G. Homologous recombination deficiency in triple negative breast cancer. Breast (Edinb. Scotl. ) 2019, 4, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Telli, M.L.; Timms, K.M.; Reid, J.; Hennessy, B.; Mills, G.B.; Jensen, K.C.; Szallasi, Z.; Barry, W.T.; Winer, E.P.; Tung, N.M.; et al. Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD) Score Predicts Response to Platinum-Containing Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients with Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2016, 22, 3764–3773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Dirix, L.Y.; Takacs, I.; Jerusalem, G.; Nikolinakos, P.; Arkenau, H.T.; Forero-Torres, A.; Boccia, R.; Lippman, M.E.; Somer, R.; Smakal, M.; et al. Avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a phase 1b JAVELIN Solid Tumor study. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2018, 167, 671–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Schmid, P.; Adams, S.; Rugo, H.S.; Schneeweiss, A.; Barrios, C.H.; Iwata, H.; Dieras, V.; Hegg, R.; Im, S.A.; Shaw Wright, G.; et al. Atezolizumab and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018, 379, 2108–2121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lin, C.H.; Liau, J.Y.; Lu, Y.S.; Huang, C.S.; Lee, W.C.; Kuo, K.T.; Shen, Y.C.; Kuo, S.H.; Lan, C.; Liu, J.M.; et al. Molecular subtypes of breast cancer emerging in young women in Taiwan: evidence for more than just westernization as a reason for the disease in Asia. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. Publ. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Cosponsored Am. Soc. Prev. Oncol. 2009, 18, 1807–1814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Howlader, N.; Altekruse, S.F.; Li, C.I.; Chen, V.W.; Clarke, C.A.; Ries, L.A.; Cronin, K.A. US incidence of breast cancer subtypes defined by joint hormone receptor and HER2 status. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2014, 106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Waddington, C.H. The epigenotype. 1942. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2012, 41, 10–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Etchegaray, J.P.; Mostoslavsky, R. Interplay between Metabolism and Epigenetics: A Nuclear Adaptation to Environmental Changes. Mol. Cell 2016, 62, 695–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Flavahan, W.A.; Gaskell, E.; Bernstein, B.E. Epigenetic plasticity and the hallmarks of cancer. Science 2017, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Cheng, Y.; He, C.; Wang, M.; Ma, X.; Mo, F.; Yang, S.; Han, J.; Wei, X. Targeting epigenetic regulators for cancer therapy: mechanisms and advances in clinical trials. Signal. Transduct. Target. Ther. 2019, 4, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Cavalli, G.; Heard, E. Advances in epigenetics link genetics to the environment and disease. Nature 2019, 571, 489–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Wu, X.; Zhang, Y. TET-mediated active DNA demethylation: mechanism, function and beyond. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2017, 18, 517–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tessarz, P.; Kouzarides, T. Histone core modifications regulating nucleosome structure and dynamics. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2014, 15, 703–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Audia, J.E.; Campbell, R.M. Histone Modifications and Cancer. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2016, 8, a019521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Michalak, E.M.; Burr, M.L.; Bannister, A.J.; Dawson, M.A. The roles of DNA, RNA and histone methylation in ageing and cancer. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2019, 20, 573–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Fujisawa, T.; Filippakopoulos, P. Functions of bromodomain-containing proteins and their roles in homeostasis and cancer. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2017, 18, 246–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Mai, A.; Massa, S.; Rotili, D.; Cerbara, I.; Valente, S.; Pezzi, R.; Simeoni, S.; Ragno, R. Histone deacetylation in epigenetics: an attractive target for anticancer therapy. Med. Res. Rev. 2005, 25, 261–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Mann, B.S.; Johnson, J.R.; Cohen, M.H.; Justice, R.; Pazdur, R. FDA approval summary: vorinostat for treatment of advanced primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Oncology 2007, 12, 1247–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Kaminskas, E.; Farrell, A.; Abraham, S.; Baird, A.; Hsieh, L.S.; Lee, S.L.; Leighton, J.K.; Patel, H.; Rahman, A.; Sridhara, R.; et al. Approval summary: azacitidine for treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome subtypes. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2005, 11, 3604–3608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. DiNardo, C.D.; Pratz, K.; Pullarkat, V.; Jonas, B.A.; Arellano, M.; Becker, P.S.; Frankfurt, O.; Konopleva, M.; Wei, A.H.; Kantarjian, H.M.; et al. Venetoclax combined with decitabine or azacitidine in treatment-naive, elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 2019, 133, 7–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Morel, D.; Jeffery, D.; Aspeslagh, S.; Almouzni, G.; Postel-Vinay, S. Combining epigenetic drugs with other therapies for solid tumours—Past lessons and future promise. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 17, 91–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Mazzone, R.; Zwergel, C.; Mai, A.; Valente, S. Epi-drugs in combination with immunotherapy: a new avenue to improve anticancer efficacy. Clin. Epigenetics 2017, 9, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Egger, G.; Liang, G.; Aparicio, A.; Jones, P.A. Epigenetics in human disease and prospects for epigenetic therapy. Nature 2004, 429, 457–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lapidus, R.G.; Ferguson, A.T.; Ottaviano, Y.L.; Parl, F.F.; Smith, H.S.; Weitzman, S.A.; Baylin, S.B.; Issa, J.P.; Davidson, N.E. Methylation of estrogen and progesterone receptor gene 5’ CpG islands correlates with lack of estrogen and progesterone receptor gene expression in breast tumors. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 1996, 2, 805–810. [Google Scholar]
  41. Zhou, Q.; Atadja, P.; Davidson, N.E. Histone deacetylase inhibitor LBH589 reactivates silenced estrogen receptor alpha (ER) gene expression without loss of DNA hypermethylation. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2007, 6, 64–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ribas, A.; Wolchok, J.D. Cancer immunotherapy using checkpoint blockade. Science 2018, 359, 1350–1355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Emens, L.A.; Cruz, C.; Eder, J.P.; Braiteh, F.; Chung, C.; Tolaney, S.M.; Kuter, I.; Nanda, R.; Cassier, P.A.; Delord, J.P.; et al. Long-term Clinical Outcomes and Biomarker Analyses of Atezolizumab Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Phase 1 Study. Jama Oncol. 2019, 5, 74–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Schmid, P.; Cortes, J.; Pusztai, L.; McArthur, H.; Kümmel, S.; Bergh, J.; Denkert, C.; Park, Y.H.; Hui, R.; Harbeck, N.; et al. Pembrolizumab for Early Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2020, 382, 810–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Joyce, J.A. Therapeutic targeting of the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Cell 2005, 7, 513–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Fang, H.; Declerck, Y.A. Targeting the tumor microenvironment: from understanding pathways to effective clinical trials. Cancer Res. 2013, 73, 4965–4977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Gatti-Mays, M.E.; Balko, J.M.; Gameiro, S.R.; Bear, H.D.; Prabhakaran, S.; Fukui, J.; Disis, M.L.; Nanda, R.; Gulley, J.L.; Kalinsky, K.; et al. If we build it they will come: targeting the immune response to breast cancer. Npj Breast Cancer 2019, 5, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Garcia-Aranda, M.; Redondo, M. Immunotherapy: A Challenge of Breast Cancer Treatment. Cancers 2019, 11, 1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wagner, J.; Rapsomaniki, M.A.; Chevrier, S.; Anzeneder, T.; Langwieder, C.; Dykgers, A.; Rees, M.; Ramaswamy, A.; Muenst, S.; Soysal, S.D.; et al. A Single-Cell Atlas of the Tumor and Immune Ecosystem of Human Breast Cancer. Cell 2019, 177, 1330–1345 e1318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Segovia-Mendoza, M.; Morales-Montor, J. Immune Tumor Microenvironment in Breast Cancer and the Participation of Estrogen and Its Receptors in Cancer Physiopathology. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Beltra, J.C.; Manne, S.; Abdel-Hakeem, M.S.; Kurachi, M.; Giles, J.R.; Chen, Z.; Casella, V.; Ngiow, S.F.; Khan, O.; Huang, Y.J.; et al. Developmental Relationships of Four Exhausted CD8(+) T Cell Subsets Reveals Underlying Transcriptional and Epigenetic Landscape Control Mechanisms. Immunity 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Leone, R.D.; Zhao, L.; Englert, J.M.; Sun, I.M.; Oh, M.H.; Sun, I.H.; Arwood, M.L.; Bettencourt, I.A.; Patel, C.H.; Wen, J.; et al. Glutamine blockade induces divergent metabolic programs to overcome tumor immune evasion. Science 2019, 366, 1013–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Aparicio, A.; Eads, C.A.; Leong, L.A.; Laird, P.W.; Newman, E.M.; Synold, T.W.; Baker, S.D.; Zhao, M.; Weber, J.S. Phase I trial of continuous infusion 5-aza-2’-deoxycytidine. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2003, 51, 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Appleton, K.; Mackay, H.J.; Judson, I.; Plumb, J.A.; McCormick, C.; Strathdee, G.; Lee, C.; Barrett, S.; Reade, S.; Jadayel, D.; et al. Phase I and pharmacodynamic trial of the DNA methyltransferase inhibitor decitabine and carboplatin in solid tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2007, 25, 4603–4609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Cohen, A.L.; Ray, A.; Van Brocklin, M.; Burnett, D.M.; Bowen, R.C.; Dyess, D.L.; Butler, T.W.; Dumlao, T.; Khong, H.T. A phase I trial of azacitidine and nanoparticle albumin bound paclitaxel in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 52413–52419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Munster, P.; Marchion, D.; Bicaku, E.; Schmitt, M.; Lee, J.H.; DeConti, R.; Simon, G.; Fishman, M.; Minton, S.; Garrett, C.; et al. Phase I trial of histone deacetylase inhibition by valproic acid followed by the topoisomerase II inhibitor epirubicin in advanced solid tumors: a clinical and translational study. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2007, 25, 1979–1985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Yardley, D.A.; Ismail-Khan, R.R.; Melichar, B.; Lichinitser, M.; Munster, P.N.; Klein, P.M.; Cruickshank, S.; Miller, K.D.; Lee, M.J.; Trepel, J.B. Randomized phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of exemestane with or without entinostat in postmenopausal women with locally recurrent or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer progressing on treatment with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. J. Clin. Oncol. Off. J. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 2013, 31, 2128–2135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Jiang, Z.; Li, W.; Hu, X.; Zhang, Q.; Sun, T.; Cui, S.; Wang, S.; Ouyang, Q.; Yin, Y.; Geng, C.; et al. Tucidinostat plus exemestane for postmenopausal patients with advanced, hormone receptor-positive breast cancer (ACE): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2019, 20, 806–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Goldstein, L.J.; Zhao, F.; Wang, M.; Swaby, R.F.; Sparano, J.A.; Meropol, N.J.; Bhalla, K.N.; Pellegrino, C.M.; Katherine Alpaugh, R.; Falkson, C.I.; et al. A Phase I/II study of suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) in combination with trastuzumab (Herceptin) in patients with advanced metastatic and/or local chest wall recurrent HER2-amplified breast cancer: a trial of the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group (E1104). Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2017, 165, 375–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Munster, P.N.; Thurn, K.T.; Thomas, S.; Raha, P.; Lacevic, M.; Miller, A.; Melisko, M.; Ismail-Khan, R.; Rugo, H.; Moasser, M.; et al. A phase II study of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat combined with tamoxifen for the treatment of patients with hormone therapy-resistant breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2011, 104, 1828–1835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Terranova-Barberio, M.; Pawlowska, N.; Dhawan, M.; Moasser, M.; Chien, A.J.; Melisko, M.E.; Rugo, H.; Rahimi, R.; Deal, T.; Daud, A.; et al. Exhausted T cell signature predicts immunotherapy response in ER-positive breast cancer. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 3584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Piha-Paul, S.A.; Hann, C.L.; French, C.A.; Cousin, S.; Brana, I.; Cassier, P.A.; Moreno, V.; de Bono, J.S.; Harward, S.D.; Ferron-Brady, G.; et al. Phase 1 Study of Molibresib (GSK525762), a Bromodomain and Extra-Terminal Domain Protein Inhibitor, in NUT Carcinoma and Other Solid Tumors. Jnci Cancer Spectr. 2020, 4, pkz093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Piha-Paul, S.A.; Sachdev, J.C.; Barve, M.; LoRusso, P.; Szmulewitz, R.; Patel, S.P.; Lara, P.N., Jr.; Chen, X.; Hu, B.; Freise, K.J.; et al. First-in-Human Study of Mivebresib (ABBV-075), an Oral Pan-Inhibitor of Bromodomain and Extra Terminal Proteins, in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Solid Tumors. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2019, 25, 6309–6319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Bolden, J.E.; Peart, M.J.; Johnstone, R.W. Anticancer activities of histone deacetylase inhibitors. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2006, 5, 769–784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Connolly, R.M.; Li, H.; Jankowitz, R.C.; Zhang, Z.; Rudek, M.A.; Jeter, S.C.; Slater, S.A.; Powers, P.; Wolff, A.C.; Fetting, J.H.; et al. Combination Epigenetic Therapy in Advanced Breast Cancer with 5-Azacitidine and Entinostat: A Phase II National Cancer Institute/Stand Up to Cancer Study. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2017, 23, 2691–2701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Chiappinelli, K.B.; Strissel, P.L.; Desrichard, A.; Li, H.; Henke, C.; Akman, B.; Hein, A.; Rote, N.S.; Cope, L.M.; Snyder, A.; et al. Inhibiting DNA Methylation Causes an Interferon Response in Cancer via dsRNA Including Endogenous Retroviruses. Cell 2015, 162, 974–986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Tie, C.H.; Fernandes, L.; Conde, L.; Robbez-Masson, L.; Sumner, R.P.; Peacock, T.; Rodriguez-Plata, M.T.; Mickute, G.; Gifford, R.; Towers, G.J.; et al. KAP1 regulates endogenous retroviruses in adult human cells and contributes to innate immune control. Embo Rep. 2018, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Rooney, M.S.; Shukla, S.A.; Wu, C.J.; Getz, G.; Hacohen, N. Molecular and genetic properties of tumors associated with local immune cytolytic activity. Cell 2015, 160, 48–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Panda, A.; de Cubas, A.A.; Stein, M.; Riedlinger, G.; Kra, J.; Mayer, T.; Smith, C.C.; Vincent, B.G.; Serody, J.S.; Beckermann, K.E.; et al. Endogenous retrovirus expression is associated with response to immune checkpoint blockade in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Jci Insight 2018, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ghoneim, H.E.; Fan, Y.; Moustaki, A.; Abdelsamed, H.A.; Dash, P.; Dogra, P.; Carter, R.; Awad, W.; Neale, G.; Thomas, P.G.; et al. De Novo Epigenetic Programs Inhibit PD-1 Blockade-Mediated T Cell Rejuvenation. Cell 2017, 170, 142–157 e119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ryan, Q.C.; Headlee, D.; Acharya, M.; Sparreboom, A.; Trepel, J.B.; Ye, J.; Figg, W.D.; Hwang, K.; Chung, E.J.; Murgo, A.; et al. Phase I and Pharmacokinetic Study of MS-275, a Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor, in Patients With Advanced and Refractory Solid Tumors or Lymphoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 2005, 23, 3912–3922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Candelaria, M.; Gallardo-Rincon, D.; Arce, C.; Cetina, L.; Aguilar-Ponce, J.L.; Arrieta, O.; Gonzalez-Fierro, A.; Chavez-Blanco, A.; de la Cruz-Hernandez, E.; Camargo, M.F.; et al. A phase II study of epigenetic therapy with hydralazine and magnesium valproate to overcome chemotherapy resistance in refractory solid tumors. Ann. Oncol. Off. J. Eur. Soc. Med. Oncol. 2007, 18, 1529–1538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Thomas, S.; Aggarwal, R.; Jahan, T.; Ryan, C.; Troung, T.; Cripps, A.M.; Raha, P.; Thurn, K.T.; Chen, S.; Grabowsky, J.A.; et al. A phase I trial of panobinostat and epirubicin in solid tumors with a dose expansion in patients with sarcoma. Ann. Oncol. Off. J. Eur. Soc. Med. Oncol. 2016, 27, 947–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Munster, P.N.; Terranova Barberio, M.; Pawlowska, N.; Moasser, M.; Chien, A.J.; Melisko, M.E.; Rugo, H.S.; Abri, K.; Harb, A.; Deal, T.; et al. Exhausted CD8+ cells (Tex) to predict response to PD-1 therapy in estrogen receptor (+) hormone therapy resistant breast cancer predictive of response to immune checkpoint inhibitors after epigenetic priming. J. Clin. Oncol. 2018, 36, 1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Boucheron, N.; Tschismarov, R.; Goeschl, L.; Moser, M.A.; Lagger, S.; Sakaguchi, S.; Winter, M.; Lenz, F.; Vitko, D.; Breitwieser, F.P.; et al. CD4(+) T cell lineage integrity is controlled by the histone deacetylases HDAC1 and HDAC2. Nat. Immunol. 2014, 15, 439–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Woods, D.M.; Woan, K.V.; Cheng, F.; Sodre, A.L.; Wang, D.; Wu, Y.; Wang, Z.; Chen, J.; Powers, J.; Pinilla-Ibarz, J.; et al. T cells lacking HDAC11 have increased effector functions and mediate enhanced alloreactivity in a murine model. Blood 2017, 130, 146–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Wang, L.; Liu, Y.; Han, R.; Beier, U.H.; Bhatti, T.R.; Akimova, T.; Greene, M.I.; Hiebert, S.W.; Hancock, W.W. FOXP3(+) regulatory T cell development and function require histone/protein deacetylase 3. J. Clin. Investig. 2015, 125, 3304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Li, B.; Samanta, A.; Song, X.; Iacono, K.T.; Bembas, K.; Tao, R.; Basu, S.; Riley, J.L.; Hancock, W.W.; Shen, Y.; et al. FOXP3 interactions with histone acetyltransferase and class II histone deacetylases are required for repression. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2007, 104, 4571–4576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Yan, K.; Cao, Q.; Reilly, C.M.; Young, N.L.; Garcia, B.A.; Mishra, N. Histone deacetylase 9 deficiency protects against effector T cell-mediated systemic autoimmunity. J. Biol. Chem. 2011, 286, 28833–28843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. Fang, Y.; Liao, G.; Yu, B. LSD1/KDM1A inhibitors in clinical trials: advances and prospects. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2019, 12, 129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Verigos, J.; Karakaidos, P.; Kordias, D.; Papoudou-Bai, A.; Evangelou, Z.; Harissis, H.V.; Klinakis, A.; Magklara, A. The Histone Demethylase LSD1/KappaDM1A Mediates Chemoresistance in Breast Cancer via Regulation of a Stem Cell Program. Cancers 2019, 11, 1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sheng, W.; LaFleur, M.W.; Nguyen, T.H.; Chen, S.; Chakravarthy, A.; Conway, J.R.; Li, Y.; Chen, H.; Yang, H.; Hsu, P.H.; et al. LSD1 Ablation Stimulates Anti-tumor Immunity and Enables Checkpoint Blockade. Cell 2018, 174, 549–563 e519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Qin, Y.; Vasilatos, S.N.; Chen, L.; Wu, H.; Cao, Z.; Fu, Y.; Huang, M.; Vlad, A.M.; Lu, B.; Oesterreich, S.; et al. Inhibition of histone lysine-specific demethylase 1 elicits breast tumor immunity and enhances antitumor efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade. Oncogene 2019, 38, 390–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Tan, A.H.Y.; Tu, W.; McCuaig, R.; Hardy, K.; Donovan, T.; Tsimbalyuk, S.; Forwood, J.K.; Rao, S. Lysine-Specific Histone Demethylase 1A Regulates Macrophage Polarization and Checkpoint Molecules in the Tumor Microenvironment of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 1351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Kleer, C.G.; Cao, Q.; Varambally, S.; Shen, R.; Ota, I.; Tomlins, S.A.; Ghosh, D.; Sewalt, R.G.; Otte, A.P.; Hayes, D.F.; et al. EZH2 is a marker of aggressive breast cancer and promotes neoplastic transformation of breast epithelial cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 11606–11611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Puppe, J.; Opdam, M.; Schouten, P.C.; Jozwiak, K.; Lips, E.; Severson, T.; van de Ven, M.; Brambillasca, C.; Bouwman, P.; van Tellingen, O.; et al. EZH2 Is Overexpressed in BRCA1-like Breast Tumors and Predictive for Sensitivity to High-Dose Platinum-Based Chemotherapy. Clin. Cancer Res. Off. J. Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. 2019, 25, 4351–4362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Italiano, A.; Soria, J.C.; Toulmonde, M.; Michot, J.M.; Lucchesi, C.; Varga, A.; Coindre, J.M.; Blakemore, S.J.; Clawson, A.; Suttle, B.; et al. Tazemetostat, an EZH2 inhibitor, in relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and advanced solid tumours: a first-in-human, open-label, phase 1 study. Lancet Oncol. 2018, 19, 649–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Peng, D.; Kryczek, I.; Nagarsheth, N.; Zhao, L.; Wei, S.; Wang, W.; Sun, Y.; Zhao, E.; Vatan, L.; Szeliga, W.; et al. Epigenetic silencing of TH1-type chemokines shapes tumour immunity and immunotherapy. Nature 2015, 527, 249–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  89. Huang, S.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, J.; Huang, J.; Zhou, L.; Luo, J.; Wan, Y.Y.; Long, H.; Zhu, B. EZH2 Inhibitor GSK126 Suppresses Antitumor Immunity by Driving Production of Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells. Cancer Res. 2019, 79, 2009–2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Meeks, J.J.; Shilatifard, A.; Miller, S.D.; Morgans, A.K.; VanderWeele, D.J.; Kocherginsky, M.; Hussain, M.H.A. A pilot study of tazemetostat and MK-3475 (pembrolizumab) in advanced urothelial carcinoma (ETCTN 10183). J. Clin. Oncol. 2020, 38, TPS607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Lewin, J.; Soria, J.-C.; Stathis, A.; Delord, J.-P.; Peters, S.; Awada, A.; Aftimos, P.G.; Bekradda, M.; Rezai, K.; Zeng, Z.; et al. Phase Ib Trial With Birabresib, a Small-Molecule Inhibitor of Bromodomain and Extraterminal Proteins, in Patients With Selected Advanced Solid Tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 2018, 36, 3007–3014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Kagoya, Y.; Nakatsugawa, M.; Yamashita, Y.; Ochi, T.; Guo, T.; Anczurowski, M.; Saso, K.; Butler, M.O.; Arrowsmith, C.H.; Hirano, N. BET bromodomain inhibition enhances T cell persistence and function in adoptive immunotherapy models. J. Clin. Investig. 2016, 126, 3479–3494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Adeegbe, D.O.; Liu, Y.; Lizotte, P.H.; Kamihara, Y.; Aref, A.R.; Almonte, C.; Dries, R.; Li, Y.; Liu, S.; Wang, X.; et al. Synergistic Immunostimulatory Effects and Therapeutic Benefit of Combined Histone Deacetylase and Bromodomain Inhibition in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Cancer Discov. 2017, 7, 852–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Adeegbe, D.O.; Liu, S.; Hattersley, M.M.; Bowden, M.; Zhou, C.W.; Li, S.; Vlahos, R.; Grondine, M.; Dolgalev, I.; Ivanova, E.V.; et al. BET Bromodomain Inhibition Cooperates with PD-1 Blockade to Facilitate Antitumor Response in Kras-Mutant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2018, 6, 1234–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Andrieu, G.P.; Shafran, J.S.; Smith, C.L.; Belkina, A.C.; Casey, A.N.; Jafari, N.; Denis, G.V. BET protein targeting suppresses the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway in triple-negative breast cancer and elicits anti-tumor immune response. Cancer Lett. 2019, 465, 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Lai, X.; Stiff, A.; Duggan, M.; Wesolowski, R.; Carson, W.E., 3rd; Friedman, A. Modeling combination therapy for breast cancer with BET and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, 5534–5539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Summary of epigenetic inhibitors in tumor microenvironment for overcoming immune evasion.
Figure 1. Summary of epigenetic inhibitors in tumor microenvironment for overcoming immune evasion.
Epigenomes 04 00027 g001
Table 1. Summary of systemic treatment for metastatic breast cancer.
Table 1. Summary of systemic treatment for metastatic breast cancer.
Subtype Incidence [21,22]Pathological Definition 1Systemic Therapies
ER or PR
>1% of cells staining
Endocrine therapy-based regimens
First line of therapy
AI + CDK4/6 inhibitor
Endocrine therapy (AI, SERD, SERM)
Subsequent-Line Therapy
AI + CDK4/6 inhibitor
mTOR inhibitor + endocrine therapy:
Everolimus + endocrine therapy (exemestane, fulvestrant, or tamoxifen)
PI3K inhibitor + endocrine therapy 2:
Alpelisib + fulvestrant
Endocrine therapy (AI, SERD, SERM)
PARP inhibitors 3
HER2 (+) with
HR (+) or HR (−)
HER2 staining: strongly positive (3+)
HER2 gene amplification by in situ hybridization assay
First line of therapy
Dual HER2-blockade + Chemotherapy:
Pertuzumab + trastuzumab + Taxanes
Subsequent-Line Therapy
Ado-trastuzumab emtansine
Anti-HER2 + chemotherapy
Negative ER, PR, and HER2Chemotherapy
Immune checkpoint inhibitor + chemotherapy
Atezolizumab + albumin-bound paclitaxel
PARP inhibitors 3
1 ASCO/CAP guidelines (PMID: 29,846,122 and 31928404): 2 for tumors with PIK3CA mutation tumors, 3 for germline BRCA1/2 mutations. ER: estrogen receptor; PR: progesterone receptor; HER2: human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; AI: aromatase inhibitor; SERM: selective estrogen receptors modulator; SERD: selective ER down-regulator.
Table 2. Clinical trials of epi-drugs in breast cancer.
Table 2. Clinical trials of epi-drugs in breast cancer.
Phase(NCT No./Ref.)Patient Population (n)InterventionsOutcomeStatus Date StartedEstimated Completion Date
DNMT Inhibitor
Phase I
Breast cancer/Solid tumor (4/19)Decitabine, continuous infusionNo responses in breast cancerCompleted
Phase I
Breast cancer/Solid tumor (5/33)Decitabine + CarboplatinNo responses in breast cancerCompleted
Phase I
Breast cancer/Solid tumor (1/16)Azacitidine + nab-paclitaxel1 PR in Breast cancerCompleted
Phase II
Hormone-resistant breast cancer (27) and TNBC (13)Azacitidine + Entinostat1 PR (1/27, 4%) in hormone-resistant breast cancer
No responses in TNBC
Phase II
Unspecified solid tumor including ER(+) HER2(−) breast cancerAzacitidine + DurvalumabOverall response rateActive, not recruitingSeptember 2016January 2022
Phase II
HER2(−) breast cancerDecitabine + Neoadjuvant PembrolizumabChanges of tumor infiltrating lymphocytesRecruitingJanuary 2017February 2023
HDAC Inhibitor
Phase II
Breast cancer/Solid tumor (3/15)Valproate + Hydralazine + chemotherapy1 SD (1/3, 33%) in breast cancerCompleted
Phase I
Breast cancer/Solid tumor (10/44)Valproate + Epirubicin3 SD (3/10, 30%) and 3 PR (3/10, 30%) in breast cancerCompleted
Phase I
Breast cancer/Solid tumor (5/37)Panobinostat + Epirubicin2 PR (2/5, 40%) in breast cancerCompleted
Phase II
ER(+) breast cancer (130)Entinostat + ExemestanePFS: 4.3 vs. 2.3 months
OS: extend 28.1 vs. 19.8 months
Phase III
ER(+) breast cancer (365)Tucidinostat + ExemestanePFS: 7.4 vs. 3.8 months
Common hematological adverse events
Phase II
HER2(+) breast cancer (16)Vorinostat + TrastuzumabNo responseCompleted
Phase II
HR(+) breast cancer (43)Vorinostat + TamoxifenObjective response: 8/43, 19%Completed
Phase II
ER(+) breast cancer (34)Vorinostat + Tamoxifen + PembrolizumabObjective response: 1/27 (4%)
Clinical benefits: 5/27 (18%)
Phase II
HER2(−) breast cancerEntinostat + Nivolumab + IpilimumabAEActive, not recruitingNovember 2015December 2020
Phase II
HR(+) HER2(−) breast cancerEntinostat + AtezolizumabObjective responseRecruitingDecember 2017October 2022
Phase II
ER(+) breast cancerVorinostat + Tamoxifen + pembrolizumabOverall response rateNot yet recruitingDecember 2020June 2026
Phase I
TNBC or HR(−) HER2(+) breast cancerEntinostat + BN-Brachyury + Adotrastuzumab emtansine + M7824Overall response rateNot yet recruitingNovember 2020January 2022
LSD1 Inhibitor
Phase I
HER2(−) breast cancerPhenelzine + Nab-paclitaxelDose-limiting toxicity
(not reported yet)
BET Inhibitor
Phase I/II
TNBC/NUT carcinoma or Solid tumor (5/65)Molibresib1 SD (1/5, 20%) and 1 PR (1/5, 20%) in breast cancer
Thrombocytopenia (51%)
Phase I
TNBC/Solid tumor (8/72)MivebresibGrade 3 or 4 AE: 57%
1 SD (1/8, 16%) in breast cancer
Phase II
TNBCZEN003694 +TalazoparibDose-limiting toxicities
Objective response
RecruitingJune 2019January 2022
Phase I/II
Unspecified advanced cancerBMS-986158 + NivolumabAERecruitingJune 2015July 2023
Abbreviations: AE: adverse events; ER: estrogen receptor; PR: progesterone receptor; HR: hormone receptor; HER2: human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; PFS: progression-free survival; PR: partial response; SD: stable disease; TNBC, triple-negative breast cancer.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Back to TopTop